Family Law Notes PDF

Preview

Summary

exam notes...

Description

Family"Law"Notes" Private"Orders" ! !

Setting!Aside!Orders"(Including"Consent"Orders)" S79A!spouse"–"s90SN!de!facto" (a) Miscarriage"of"justice"by"reason"of"fraud,"duress,"suppression"of"evidence"(inc"failure"to" disclose"relevant"information)"or"giving"of"false"evidence"or"any"other"circumsrances"–" In#Marriage#of#Gebert" (b) Change"of"circumstances"since"the"order"was"made"that"renders"it"impracticable"for" order"to"be"carried"out" (c) A"person"has"defaulted""in"carrying"out"an"obligation"imposed"on"the"person"by"the" order,"and"in"the"circumstances"that"have"arisen"due"to"that"default,"it"is"just"and" equitable"to"vary/set"aside"order" (d) Exceptional"circumstances"have"arisen"since"the"making"of"the"order"relating"to"care," welfare"and"development"of"the"child"and"the"applicant"will"suffer"hardship"if"court" does"not"vary/set"aside" (e) Proceeds"of"crime"order"has"been"made" Court!may!vary!or!set!aside…!

" "

1."Informal"Agreements" •

Even"if"in"writing"will"not"oust"jurisdiction"of"Court"under"s79/90SM"to" make"property"orders"

"

2."Consent"Orders" " Made"orally"during"a"hearing,"lodging"a"draft"consent"order"(Family"Law"Rules"2004"rule" 10.15(1)(a)"etc" • Parenting"and"property"issues"in"one"document" • Must"be"satisfied"orders"presented"to"Court"are"just"and"equitable"s79(2)90SM(3)" • Harris&v&Caladine&1991:"court"still"has"duty"to"scrutinize"orders"before"them."Don’t"just" accept."May"not"be"full"scrutiny"as"in"an"assessment"below"!"but"more"than"a"cursory" glance"as"to"if"its"J+E" " ‘Miscarriage!of!Justice’! • Prior#2002:"wife"not"legally"represented"at"time"consent"orders"made."Later"complained" of"MoJ"–"felt"pressured"(but"no"duress)"to"sign."Refused"application;"important"that"" settlement"arrived"at"was"not"obviously"disadvantageous"to"wife" & In&the&Marriage&of&Gebert:"1990" Terms"of"consent"order:"husband"received"assets"to"value"of"$10,000"&"wife"$112,000" (10%/90%)"In"Court:"40%/6%0.""NO!miscarriage!of!justice" • Fact"the"consent"order"was"unfair"did"not"of"itself"provide"a"reason"for"setting"aside"an" order"on"basis"of"miscarriage"of"justice" • He"was"under"emotional"stress"but"that"did"not"render"consent"invalid" • Attempting"to"make"clear"to"wife"marriage"was"at"an"end" • Given"opportunity"to"seek"legal"advice"and"deliberately"chose"not"to" • Clear"that#husband#was#subjected#to#no#pressure#of#any#kind#from#wife#who#not#only#acted# entirely#properly,#but#went#out#of#her#way#to#suggest#husband#should#get#legal#advice" • There#may#be#some#circumstances#where#the#order#is#so#unreasonable#it#will#give#rise#to# inference#that#a#parties#reasoning#was#affected"

" 1" "

" 3."Binding"Financial"Agreements" "

1."When"they"are"made" If"done"properly"oust"the"jurisdiction"of"the"Court"s71A!–"s90SA" e Often"impacts"vulnerable"parties"(esp"women"who"have"lower"income)" " When"they"make"it;"said"to"be"made"under"these"sections:" Married!Relationships! ! De!Facto!Relationships" e" Before"marriage"s90B" e" Before"Relationship"s90UB" e" During"Marriage"s90C" e" During"Relationship"s90UCC" e" After"Divorce"s90D" " e" After"breakdown"s90UD" " " "

People&separated&but¬&divorced&can&make&a&BFA&under&90C&(section&90C(2A)&makes&this& clear).& &De facto&relationships&–&if&the&relationship&is¤t&then&a&BFA&under&90UC,&if&they&have& separated&then&under&90UD. " Rationale:" Hoult&&&Hoult"[2011]:"he"had"$32mil."Marriage"broke"down"after"6"years."She"obtained"legal" advice"and"signed"agreement."Parties"who"are"independent"advised"and"receive"appropriate" advice"–"in"the"absence"of"fraud,"unconscionability"or"other"vitiating"factors"–"be"free"to"bind" themselves"to"entirely"unjust"and"inequitable"agreement…"Parties"are"perfectly#free#to#make#a#bad# bargain." "

2.!Requirements!for!BFA"s90G–"s90UJ!" (a)" (b)" (c)" (ca)" (d)" " " "

Agreement"signed"by"all"parties"" Independent"legal"advice"– "effect"of"agreement,"advantages"&"disadvantages" Signed"statement"as"to"provision"of"legal"advise" "Copy"of"statement"(c)"to"other"party" Agreement"has"not"been"terminated"or"set"aside"by"a"court"

3.!HOW!TO!SET!ASIDE! 1. 2. 3. 4.

Parties"may"agree"to"terminate"s90J!(M)–"s9UL!(DF)" Did!not!comply!with!formal!requirements!90G!UU!90UJ!" Agreement"should"not"be"enforced"as"a"contract"(90KA"ee"s90UN)" One"or"more"grounds"provided"under"ss90K"ee"90UM"

& 1. 2.

Parties&Agree& The&Formal&Requirements& " How!to!Construe!The!Requirements:"Used#to#be#strict#compliance,#now#purposive#approach.# • Black#&#Black"2008:#strict"compliance"needed.#Here:"not"binding"because"independent"legal" advice"annexed"to"agreement"rather"than"in"it"(FLA"provisions"at"time"required)# • Sullivan#201"–""not"binding"b/c"wife"signed"before"marriage"and"wife"signed"after"marriage"" • Wallace#&#Stelzer#&#Anor"2013:"strict"compliance"approach"no"longer"the"appropriate"way." Reflects"a"purposive"approach"to"provisions."Wallace"(51)"and"Stelzer"(38"pole"dancer)"in"de" facto"for"7"years"then"got"married."BFA"said"he"would"pay"her"$3.25mil"if"marriage"failed" within"4"years."Did"after"2."He"argued"agreement"was"in"form"of"2003"amendment"and"didn’t" comply"with"2009"which"had"retrospective"application."Court:"could!be!construed!in!a!way! that!overcome!inconsistencies" #

2" "

3.!Legal!Advice!Requirement! •

Hoult&[2011"Marriage"broke"down"after"6"years."($32mil)"She"obtained"legal"advice"and" signed"agreement."Tried"to"claim"no"proper"legal"advice"because"meeting"was"50mins,"no"file" notes,"no"letter"given"to"her"after."WAS"BINDING:"only"necessary"enquiry"is"whether" independent"advice"was"given"and"not"the"content"of"the"advicee" • Where"legal"advice"is"given;"the"onus"shifts"to"the"other"party"to"establish"advice"had"not" been"given"

" "

4.!

90K(1)/90UM(1)!Circumstances!to!Set!Aside!BFA!

" A"court"may"set"aside"a"financial"agreement"if"one"or"more"of"the"grounds"set"out"in" 90K(1)/90UM(1)"is"established" (a)" Fraud"including&nonJdisclosure&of&a&material&matter" (aa)"" Party"enterged"the"agreement"to"(i)"defraud"or"defeat"creditor/s""or"(ii)"reckless" disrefgard"to"creditors" (ab)" Entered"the"agreement"to"(i)"defraud"another"spouse/de"facto"or"(ii)"defeat"interests"of" another"person"in"s90M"or"90UL"claim"or"(reckless"disregard"to"interests"of"that"other" person" " (b)" Agreement"is"void,"voidable"or"unenforceable" (c)" Chance"in"circumstances"since"the"agreement"was"made"that"make"it"impractical"to"be" carried"out" " (d)" Material!change!in!circumstances"has"changed"in"relation"to"care,"welfare"and" development"of"child"of"marriage"and"party"will!suffer!hardship"if"court"does"not"set" aside" • Frampton#&#Frampton#2007:#"Wife"relocated"to"England"with"her"new"partner"and"left" husband"and"other"child"in"Australia."This""WAS"material"change"in"circumstances"but" ‘hardship’"not"established"!"must!have!hardship!too! o Hardship"relates"to"hardness,"severity,"privation"that"which"is"hard"to"bear"or"a" substantial"detriment;! • Pascot#2011#birth"of"third"child"not"contemplated"at"the"time"IS! " (e)" Party"to"agreement"engaged"in"conduct"that"was"in"all"the"circumstances"is" unconscionable;"# o Saintclaire#&#Saintclaire#2013:"violent"husband."2"incidents"within"11"months"of" BFA;"1"4"months"before."Wife"emotionally"vulnerable,"just"had"major"surgery" and"worried"about"marriage/childrens"future"if"she"did"not"sign."! " Financial!agreement!unenforceable!due!to!undue!influence!and! unconscionable!conduct.!Husband"in"‘vastly"superior"position’! " Didnt"reveal"to"solicitor"till"last"minute;"not"all"info"etc."Vulnerability"not" neutralized"by"having"legal"advice! ! " (f)" Superannuation"stuff" (g)" Superannuation"stuff"

3" "

Property!Disputes!ULitigation! In"Australia"we"retain"our"ownership"interest;"there"is"a"seprate"property"regime"under"which"no" automatic"coeownership"arises"from"the"fact"you"are"married/de"facto" " 1. Jurisdiction" 2. Have"Time"Requirements"Been"met" " "

1.!Jurisdiction!–!de!facto! s90SB!a"Court"can"make"an"order"under"90SM"(and"maintenance"and"urgent"maintenance" orders)"if"satisfied:" (a) The"period"or"total"periods"of"relationship"is"at"least"2"years"or" (b) There"is"a"child"of"the"de"facto"relationship"or" (c) That"the"party"made"contributions"and"a"‘failure"to"make"the"order…"would"result"in" serious"injustice’"or" (d) A"registered"relationship" S4AA! Exam:#X#and#Y#have#been#together#for#more#than#two#years#so#meet#the#criteria#for#a#de#facto# relationship#under#s90SB)# "

2.!Time!Requirements" • • •

Married;"12"months"after"divorce"is"final"s44(3)U(4)" De!facto:"within"two"years"of"relationship"having"ended"s44(5)U(6)" Exceptions:"for"both" o Hardship" " Richardson#and#Richardson"2008:"brought"13"years"out"of"time."They" were"married"for"20"years;"no"significant"assets"at"time"of"separation"so" no"agreement."He"won"lottery"and"bought"a"house"she"lived"in."She"was" also"very"sick"over"period."Financial"circumstances"went"down"and"he" want"to"sell"house."Hardship:!she"was"unable"to"support"herself"now"!" Court"will"also"consider"prop"accrued"after"separation"in"asset"pool" o Maintenance"application"for"social"security"

" "

3."The!Steps! • •

Partnership"e""utility"focus;"collective"effort"and"role"division."Marriage"is"a"partnership" you"make"contributions"to"(eg"Bevan)" Individualistic:"rights"focus;"amrriage"as"an"arrangement"between"individuals"and"efforts" are"made"on"a"more"discrete"basis"

& & " Previously"was"a"4"step"test"(Pastrikos;#Hickey)"but"this"has""changed"since"Stanford" " "

5!STEP!TEST!–!POST!STANFORD!(2012)! 1. Identify"the"legal"and"equitable"interests"of"the"parties"in"their"property"–"" o Assets"and"liabilities" " 2. "Is"it"just"and"equitable"to"make"and"order!altering!those!interests!s79(2);!s90SM(3)" 3. If"yes,"identify"contributions"per"ss79(4)(a)e(c);"90SM(4)(a)(c)" 4. Consider"the"additional"matters"s79(4)(d)e(g);"90SM(4)(d)e(g)"including"the"matters"ins" s75(2);90SF(3)" 5. Determine"in"all"the"circumstances"what"order"would"be"just"and"equitable" "

4" "

STEP!ONE:!Identify"the"Legal"and"Equitable"Interests" of"the"Parties"in"Their"Property"Stanford& "

1." " 2."

Income" Property"

Definition!of!Property"section"4"FLA."Property#means# (a) In"relation"to"parties"to"a!marriage"–"means"property"to"which"those"parties"are,"or"that" party"is,"as"the"case"may"be,"entitled,"whether"in"possession"or"reversion"or" (b) In"relation"to"parties"to"de"facto"relationship"–"means"property"to"which"those"parties"are,"or" that"part"is,"as"the"case"may"be,"entitled,"whether"in"possession"or"reversion." " • Property!under!FLA!should!be!read!broadly!In#the#Marriage#of#Duff"1977"and"is"broader" than"at"common"law"Kennon#v#Spry"2008" • Property"that"is"currently"existing:"property"disposed"of"considered"in"75(2)(o)"but"not"here;" Bevan;#Stanford" " Types!of!Property" • Superannuation"is"a"type"of"property"under"s90MC" o Hickey#2003:#the"same"approach"should"be"applied"to"superannuation"when" making"orders" o Coghlan#and#Coghlan"2005;"superannuation"is"‘another"species"of"asset’"and"the" preferred"approach"is"treating"them"as"two"pools."Yet"best"to"follow"same"s79" approach"for"each"" • Shares"In#the#Marriage#of#Duff#(1977)" • Lottery"wins""Zyk#&#Zyk#1995" • ""Gosper#&#Gosper1987" " • TRUSTS" o Assets"of"family"discretionary"trust"Kennon#v#Spry"2008;"husbands"power"as" trustee"to"appoint"whole"of"assets"to"wife"who"was"beneficiary" o Damages"fund"held"on"trust"for"sole"benefit"of"husband#Holmes#&#Holmes"1988" o Full"control"over"trust"–"husband"was"beneficiary"and"trustee"#Harris"1991" " • Chose"in"action"–"personal"right."Depends"what"it"is"–"normally"need"to"have"alienability" (right"to"transfer)" o Bare"right"to"sue"not"property;"Zorbas#&#Zorbas#1990"–"husband"injured"in"car" accident"and"commenced"proceedings."Wife"wanted"to"say"damages"apart"of" property."Held:!All"he"had"was"right"to"proceed"to"cover"damages"e"right!to!sue! could!not!be!transferred!as!it!was!not!personal." o Partnership"interest(through"shares)"in"a"law"firm"WAS"property"despite" limited"degree"it"could"be"assigned"to"another"person–"Best#&#Best"1993"–" property"because"there"was"always"a"certain"amount"of"income"and"could"be" identified" " • Inheritances" " More"likely"to"be"treated"as"property"of"the"beneficiary"if""received"late"in"the" relationship"and"there"are"‘ample"funds"from"which"an"appropriate"propertly" settlement"can"be"made"and"a"just"results"arrived"at’"(Bonnici#&#Bonnici#1991)" " Expected""inheritances;"unlikely"unless"definite;""Mere"expection"to"receive" inheritance"is"not"enough"White#&#Tullock#v#White"1995" ! IS!NOT!PROPERTY! • Mere"expectation"to"receive"inheritance"is"not"enough"White#&#Tullock#v#White#1995" " "

5" "

"

3."

Financial"Resource""

Court"only"has"power"to"order"interests"in"relation"to"property"in"s79"BUT"will"CONSIDER" financial"resources"and"make"an"adjustment"for"them" " • Crapp"Fogarty"J"1979"–"broad!approach!to!financial!resource" • Must"add"something"not"covered"by"property"and"income"In#the#Marriage#of#Kelly"((No"2)" 1981"–"" • Types"of"Financial"Resources"–"ie"some"‘property’"haven’t"yet"received" o Contingent"interest"or"benefit"that"a"party"is"likely"to"receive"In#the#Marriage# Kelly"1981"(EG"beneficiary"of"trust_" o Ability"of"a"party"to"raise"funds" o Regular"gifts"or"financial"assistance"received"by"a"party"from"their"parents"" o Rent"from"property" o Some"employment"entitlements" " Long"service"leave"Gould#&#Gould"1996:"due"to"real"likelihood"and" certaintity"would"be"paid"out"and"taken"(it"was"just"about"to"happen)" ! " "

6" "

" STEP"2:""Is"it"just"and"equitable"to"make"and"order!altering! those!interests!s79(2);!s90SM(3)" •

•

• • • • •

In"most"cases"this"will"be"readily"satisfied"where"the"marriage"has"broken"down" (Stanford#2012# o Where"spouses"living"apart"involuntarily"bare"fact"of"separation"did"not"show" J+E"to"make"order"interfering"with"existing"rights"Stanford# In"most"cases"the"answer"to"this"will"be"yes"due"to"dependent"children,"how"they’ve" organized"finances"or"the"length"of"the"relationship"(Stanford;#Bevan)#or"both"agree"to" come"but"cant"agree"how"to"divide# Parties!have!agreed!–!just"cannot"agree"on"how"to"distribute"assets# Bevan#&#Bevan#2013\#we"can"get"more"information"about"this"by"looking"at" 79(4)/90SM(3)"factors# Chapman#&#Chapman2014"step"back;"no"requirement"to"consider"79(4)/90SM(3)"factors" and"to"exercise"caution"so"as"not"to"conflate"them# Manolis#&#Manolis"2011#–#j+e"requirement"obliges"court"to"stand"back"from"its" preliminary"determination"and"consider"its"impact."# Short&term&relationship:&argue"both!of!the!parties!have!agreed!to!order!and!child!of! the!relationship."May"need"to"look"at"contribution"factors"in"order"to"answer"J+E."(As"in" Bevan)#

" Where!NOT!J+E:" 1. Stanford;##involuntary"separation,"nursing"home,"seeking"property"settlement"for"their" mother."" 2. Bevan#v#Bevan#2013:"had"been"so"long"after"they"had"made"informal"agreement."She’d" dealt"with"and"disclosed"assets"already."" " Stanford&&&Stanford&2012:"parties"married"for"37"years"living"in"home"owned"by"husband."Wife" became"ill"and"required"nursing"home"care."Husband"continued"to"provide"for"her"including" putting"$40,000"in"a"bank"account"for"medical"needs."Their"relationship"had"not"broken"down"but" had"been"living"apart"involuntarily"due"to"her"illness."Daughter"(acting"as"guardian)"sought" orders"to"sell"matrimonial"home"(worth"$1.3mil)"and"split"super"funds"–"dividing"proceeds" equally"between"parties."Would"not"be"J+E"to"make" # & Bevan&&&Bevan&2013:"husband"and"wife"married"for"22"years"and"2"children"before"husband" took"to"the"seas."In"his"absence"wife"had"looked"after"financial"affairs,"husbands"mother," property,"children"etc."Full"Court:"said"it"would"not"be"just"and"equitable"to"make"s79"order"given" husbands"representations"about"property"and"applying"for"orders"2"days"before"time"limit." • Accepted"he"had"made"valuable"contributions"over"22"years"including"after"he"decided"to" leave"wife,"and"not"making"an"order"would"leave"him"with"virtually"no"assets"and"sig" liabilities"(costs"incurred"by"litigation)" "

"

7" "

" STEP"3."Identify"Contributions"ss79(4)(a)e(c);" 90SM(4)(a)e(c)" "

1."

"

Approach"

When"assessing"contributions"the"court"may"take"a"global"approach,"an"assetebyeasset"approach," or"a"combination"of"the"two"(Norbis#v#Norbis"1986)" • Global"Approach"–"looks"at""overall"contribution s"made"by"each"party"to"their"past"and" present"property"as"a"whole" • Asset"by"asset"–"court"looking"at"contributions"made"by"each"party"to"specific"items"of" property" " Clives#and#Clives"[2008]"FamCAFC"172"property"alteration"where"a"global"approach"was"taken"for" the"property,"but"an"assetebyeasset"for"the"super"" " • General!approach!is!global!for!both!marriage!and!de!facto"Norbis#v#Norbis#(de"facto" example)"Aitken#&#Murphy#2013."" " • Asset"by"asset"may"be"more#likely"where" o Relationship"has"been"short"and"finances"kept"separate"(McMahon#and# McMahon"1995)" o When"one"party"has"built"up"assets"of"a"‘special"skill’"or"when"substantial"lapse" of"time"between"separation"and"datre"of"hearing"during"which"parties"have" accumulated"substantial"new"assets"and"liabilities"(Z#v#Z)" • Could"do"hybrid"where"assets"have"come"after"separation"(and"global"for"during)" " "

2."

" Starting"Point"

No"starting"point"of"equality"although"it"is"often"the"end"point"Mallet#1984" • There"is"no"assumption"a"party"has"any"right"to"property"" " Is"there"a"starting"point"of"equality?"Is"here"an"argufment"for"such"a"position?" • ORIGNALLY:"starting"point"of"equality"where"long"marriage"and"accumulated"assets"In# the#marriage#of#Rolfe"1977" • NOW:!that’s"wrong;!there!is!no!starting!point"e"would"be"contrary"to"discretionary" nature"of"79(4)"Mallet1984" &

8" "

&

3.!

Contributions!to!Property!!

s79(4)(a)U(b)!U!90SM(4)((a)U(b)! As#is#the#approach#in#T#v#T"2006;"look"at"contributions"for"property"and"superannuation" separately,"and"then"consider"needs"together."" " "

1.!FINANCIAL"s79(4)(a)"or"90SM(4)(a)" The&financial&contributions&made&direct&and&indirectly&to&the&acquisition,&conservation&or& improvement&of&any&of&the&property&of&the&parties& • Direct"financial"contributions" " Deposit"on"home"(acquisition)" " Mortgage"repayments"(acquisition)" " Paying"for"home"repairs"(conservation)" " Home"improvements"(improvement)" " • Indirect"financial"contributions" " Household"expenses;"water,"gas,"electricity,"council"rates" " " rd

A."

Gifts"–"from"3 "Parties"

By&or&on#behalf#of#the#parties#(ie&gifts&of&money&from&parents&to&buy&property)& • Party"to"whom"a"gift"is"made"normally"regarded"as"having"contributed"it"(Gosper#1987)" o Unless"there"is"evidence"the"intention"wasn’t"just"to"benefit"one"party"(Kessy"1994" • BUT"timing"of"receipt"and"duration"of"relationship"is"relevant" o Gift"received"early"in"long"term"r/s"likely"given"less"weight"as"contribution"to"one"party" than"one"received"close"to"separation"or"when"parties"in"short"term"r/s"Pellingro#1997" Gift#given#to#both#will#be#seen#as#equal#contribution#from#both#parties# !

A(ii)." •

•

Inheritances!

More"likely"to"be"treated"as"property"of"the"beneficiary"if"it"is"received"late"in"the" relationship"and"there"are"‘ample"funds"from"which"an"appropriate"property"settlement"can" be"made"and"a"just"results"arrived"at’"(Bonnici#1992)" Expected""inheritances;"unlikely"unless"definite;""Mere"expectation"to"receive"inheritance"is" not"enough"White#&#Tullock#v1995" " "

B."

"Lottery"Wins"and"other"Windfalls!

Considered"as"contribution"of"one"or"both"of"parties"depending"on"circumstnaces" ! !Who!purchased!ticket!not!decisive" • During!...